Background George Siemens came loudly into educational theorizing prominence with his seminal article, Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, published in December, 2004. In this article, Siemens asserted that a concept that he called, “Connectivism”, was a new educational learning theory. Connectivism greatly broadened and borrowed from the three established learning theories of the 20th century – behaviorism, cognitivism and constructionism. The significance of his announcement, that Connectivism was a fourth learning theory was not lost on Plon Verhagen, professor of Educational Design at the University of Twente. Verhagen authored a paper opposing Siemens claims. This rebuttal was seconded by Bill Kerr, another educational critic. In turn, professors Stephen Downs and Eyal Sivan independently challenged the rebuttals along with a significant number of blog entries on Siemens’ site in favor of the new learning theory declaration. After a great deal of reading and thought, I agree with these educators that Seimen’s concept, Connectivism, is indeed a new learning theory. I have come to this conclusion with a slightly different analysis than those presented by the aforementioned educators.
What is Connectivism and Why is There Such a Hubbub Around it? Seimens takes basic definitions of learning and knowledge and significantly alters their traditional meanings to define Connectivism. Learning is no longer linear, from teacher to student. According to Seimens, 2004, learning has become
“a process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing. Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical. “
To try and make sense of some of the confusing concepts of Connectivism, I drew up a chart of simple vocabulary used by Siemens and his detractors. The process of composing this chart was one of the factors that made me realize that Siemens has a point. I was not learning from a teacher, I was discovering learning from a multitude of readings and rewordings that I initiated without instruction or collaboration to figure out what this learning theory was all about.
Traditional Definition
Connectivism Interpretation
Learning: to gain knowledge, understanding, or skill through study, instruction, or experience.
Learning: a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources to practice and reflect.
Theory: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
Theory: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
Teacher: one whose occupation is to instruct
Teacher: any person or thing that models, demonstrates, and shapes network learning
Pedagogy: the art, science, or profession of teaching.
Pedagogy: classroom practices that include technology, and changed roles of teachers and students where the teacher is not the source of all knowledge
Knowledge: is qualitative and quantitative and obtainable through reasoning or experiences
Knowledge: is qualitative, quantitative and distributed or “connective knowledge”. A property of one entity must lead to or become a property of another entity in order for them to be considered connected.
(Sources: Merriam Webster (traditional); Blog and papers of Seimens, Downes, and Veill (for Connectivism Interpretations.)
Why is Connectivism a new Learning Theory?
Verhagen called Seimens analysis circular, confusing and using redundancy of terminology. He stated that it was weak in substance because it copied tenets from older theories, particularly Constructivism. The phrase Verhagen used to question the validity of Connectivism was whether it was actually “Pedagogy?” Pedagogy, using either definition above, is a practice or way of teaching, while a Theory is a general principle that explains something. A pedagogy is generally true for most teachers and their students, while a theory should be true for all teachers and students. Trying it out, I listed truisms (theories) and pedagogies (practices).
Simple truisms (theories) include: Children learn differently; Teachers do not know everything; Learning connects to ones needs or values. (All)
Simple pedagogical practices include: Learning occurs in smaller groups; Mornings are the best time to learn/study; The teacher must teach content knowledge. (Most)
I noticed that since none of these “truisms” could be termed pedagogy, then they had to belong to the theory realm of educational beliefs, and therefore, Siemens was on the right track, as all of these truisms are part and parcel of his Connectivism Theory as are many more. Similarly, since a theory can be an on-going work in progress,that should be constantly evaluated, (per scientific observations), it doesn’t really matter if a theory borrows from another, or postulates outside of its stated field. As Downes, and especially Sivan, so eloquently noted, Siemens’ Connectivism can be extended to sociology and psychology. I would further extend the premise to predict future extensions to cultural anthropology and perhaps even business (organizational behavior.)
What does Connectivism provide to educators? There were several clever sites and images that answer this question for the Connected Teacher.
Multi-tasker or Connected
Likewise, this YouTube video addresses the future of connectivity and the networked teacher.
Siemens and Downes often collaborate and are good self-promoters. They write, teach, have blogs, YouTube videos, and lecture extensively. So I’m going to let them say what Connectivism should not be and what the Connected Educator and her students should look forward to in the 21st Century. “I want to resist the mindset of measuring what is possible by the existing system.”… “I’m suggesting something much more subtle: that we no longer allow systems-based arguments and criticism to dampen our creative exploration for what is possible in education.” (Siemens 2004)
Summary Connectivism is a modern education learning theory for the 21st century. While it has a few traditionalists as detractors, I believe it will stand the test of time and will help educators evolve education into a more open, creative, and collaborative process using technology and other distributed information sources to learn, grow and contribute to the world at large.
The Connected Educator
By: Mary-Ellen Quintana
Background
George Siemens came loudly into educational theorizing prominence with his seminal article, Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, published in December, 2004. In this article, Siemens asserted that a concept that he called, “Connectivism”, was a new educational learning theory. Connectivism greatly broadened and borrowed from the three established learning theories of the 20th century – behaviorism, cognitivism and constructionism. The significance of his announcement, that Connectivism was a fourth learning theory was not lost on Plon Verhagen, professor of Educational Design at the University of Twente. Verhagen authored a paper opposing Siemens claims. This rebuttal was seconded by Bill Kerr, another educational critic. In turn, professors Stephen Downs and Eyal Sivan independently challenged the rebuttals along with a significant number of blog entries on Siemens’ site in favor of the new learning theory declaration. After a great deal of reading and thought, I agree with these educators that Seimen’s concept, Connectivism, is indeed a new learning theory. I have come to this conclusion with a slightly different analysis than those presented by the aforementioned educators.
What is Connectivism and Why is There Such a Hubbub Around it?
Seimens takes basic definitions of learning and knowledge and significantly alters their traditional meanings to define Connectivism. Learning is no longer linear, from teacher to student. According to Seimens, 2004, learning has become
“a process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing.
Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical. “
To try and make sense of some of the confusing concepts of Connectivism, I drew up a chart of simple vocabulary used by Siemens and his detractors. The process of composing this chart was one of the factors that made me realize that Siemens has a point. I was not learning from a teacher, I was discovering learning from a multitude of readings and rewordings that I initiated without instruction or collaboration to figure out what this learning theory was all about.
Why is Connectivism a new Learning Theory?
Verhagen called Seimens analysis circular, confusing and using redundancy of terminology. He stated that it was weak in substance because it copied tenets from older theories, particularly Constructivism. The phrase Verhagen used to question the validity of Connectivism was whether it was actually “Pedagogy?” Pedagogy, using either definition above, is a practice or way of teaching, while a Theory is a general principle that explains something. A pedagogy is generally true for most teachers and their students, while a theory should be true for all teachers and students. Trying it out, I listed truisms (theories) and pedagogies (practices).
Simple truisms (theories) include: Children learn differently; Teachers do not know everything; Learning connects to ones needs or values. (All)
Simple pedagogical practices include: Learning occurs in smaller groups; Mornings are the best time to learn/study; The teacher must teach content knowledge. (Most)
I noticed that since none of these “truisms” could be termed pedagogy, then they had to belong to the theory realm of educational beliefs, and therefore, Siemens was on the right track, as all of these truisms are part and parcel of his Connectivism Theory as are many more. Similarly, since a theory can be an on-going work in progress,that should be constantly evaluated, (per scientific observations), it doesn’t really matter if a theory borrows from another, or postulates outside of its stated field. As Downes, and especially Sivan, so eloquently noted, Siemens’ Connectivism can be extended to sociology and psychology. I would further extend the premise to predict future extensions to cultural anthropology and perhaps even business (organizational behavior.)
What does Connectivism provide to educators?
There were several clever sites and images that answer this question for the Connected Teacher.
Likewise, this YouTube video addresses the future of connectivity and the networked teacher.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tahTKdEUAPk&feature=related
Siemens and Downes often collaborate and are good self-promoters. They write, teach, have blogs, YouTube videos, and lecture extensively. So I’m going to let them say what Connectivism should not be and what the Connected Educator and her students should look forward to in the 21st Century.
“I want to resist the mindset of measuring what is possible by the existing system.”… “I’m suggesting something much more subtle: that we no longer allow systems-based arguments and criticism to dampen our creative exploration for what is possible in education.” (Siemens 2004)
http://www.slideshare.net/Downes/connectivism-a-theory-of-personal-learning
Summary
Connectivism is a modern education learning theory for the 21st century. While it has a few traditionalists as detractors, I believe it will stand the test of time and will help educators evolve education into a more open, creative, and collaborative process using technology and other distributed information sources to learn, grow and contribute to the world at large.
References
Consortium for School Networking(COSN) Video, (2010) Learning to Change Changing to Learn Advancing K-12 Technology Leadership, retrieved on July 8, 2007 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tahTKdEUAPk&feature=related
Downes, Stephen, (2007). An Introduction to Connective Knowledge, Revised. Retrieved on July 9, 2010, from http://www.downes.ca/post/33034
Downes, Stephen (2007). What Connectivism Is”. Retrieved July 11, 2010 from http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html
Downes, Stephen, (2008) Slide Show presenting his Open Course on Connectivism, Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/Downes/connectivism-a-theory-of-personal-learning
Google Images, (2008). Networked Teacher. Retrieved on July 11, 2010 from http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http:pwoessner.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/networked-teacher.jpg&imgrefurl=http://pwoessner.com/2008/12/15/21st-century-literacy-network-literacy/&usg=1dtcpHVJDHABLVfbBM9xjZdJflc=&h=500&w=500&sz=75&hl=en&start=1&tbnid=htrOE1cMznfQsM:&tbnh=130&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dnetworked%2Bteacher%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1
Siemens, George, (2010). Blog,
Connectivisim. Retrieved, July 4, 2010 from http://www.connectivism.ca/
Siemens, George, (2004). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age.” Retrieved July 5, 2010, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Sivan, Eyal (2008). Blog, The Connective, retrieved July 11, 2010 from http://theconnective.org/2008/08/26/connectivism-as-learning-theory/
Vaill, P. B., (1996). Learning as a Way of Being. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Blass Inc.
Verhagen, B.P., (2006). Connectivism: A New Learning Theory?” Retrieved on July 6, 2010 from http://www.surfspace.nl/nl/Redactieomgeving/Publicaties/Documents/Connectivism%20a%20new%20theory.pdf
Wikipedia, retrieved on July http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectivism_(learning_theory)
==============================================================================================